Three descriptions illustrate how those at home helped with the military effort. To assist the government in funding the war, they purchased war bonds. Thus, option (B) is correct.
<h3>What is war?</h3>
War is defined as a violent armed confrontation between states, governments, society, or paramilitary groups such as mercenaries, insurgents, and militias. It is characterized by severe violence, damage, and mortality, and it employs either conventional or irregular military troops.
The War Support campaign involves inviting your friends to join the Second Extinction emailing list. As you recommend friends, you will earn incentives both in-game and outside the game. While a player may not have declared war on an empire in Humankind, winning in battle will increase a player's War Support.
Therefore, Thus, option (B) is correct.
Learn more about war here:
brainly.com/question/3445478
#SPJ1
The differences in the wild and hatcheries make it so the different salmon adapt differently and have different traits.
If salmon are split up into different habitats, one being in the wild and one being in captivity, they will eventually have different adaptations from each other and their offspring will develop traits that are better suited for their environment.
Wild salmon and salmon that are raised in captivity are going to be very different from each other. The salmon in captivity do not have to actively hunt for their food, be wary of certain predators, or may not want to reproduce.
Taking these factors into account, it is very possible that the salmon raised in captivity will have reduced reproductive success compared to the salmon that thrive in the wild. Along with this, they would most likely have many genetic differences from each other and other traits that better adapt to their living situations.
Answer:
The conflict, fought between June and October 1877, stemmed from the refusal of several bands of the Nez Perce, dubbed "non-treaty Indians," to give up their ancestral lands in the Pacific Northwest and move to an Indian reservation in Idaho.
Is this a question or statement????
The supreme court decision under John Marshall leadership have extended federal powers, but not too much in the sense of destroying the federalist idea that brought the United States together. Marshall was guided by a strong commitment to judicial power and by a belief in the supremacy of national over state legislatures. His judicial vision was very much in keeping with the Federalist political program in line with the constitution.
It can be argued that someone not elected should not have power to shape government and law through the Expansion of the Judiciary in 1801, but the Marshall Court, and this decision in particular, established the principle of "judicial review" whereby Congressional laws and executive actions may be judged by the Supreme Court to be within the bounds of the Constitution.
It is definitely not appropriate that a political party ideology is implemented through the judiciary, however, In keeping with John Marshall's Federalist views, they generally favored strong government action and especially supported the supremacy of the federal government over state authorities as long as it was constitutional.
